I am a recent convert to chess video tutorials and after watching Part 1 of Tatev's Winawer I was impressed. However I agree that it is not perfect and her pronunciation of certain phrases and words makes it difficult to continue focusing on the material. There is evidence that she is unsure where the tutorial is going and her glib comments mentioned by InspiredSquare are not helpful. Overall I was happy with the content.

To say that someone needs to get a life when all they have done is spent a number of hours on an absorbing topic trying to understand it and provide useful constructive criticism to pass onto others is unhelpful and rude.

I would prefer to accept a review of that sort in place of a few flippant comments where there has not even been an attempt to correct typo errors.

Reviews offer a balanced view and help everyone who has not got the time to absorb the abundance of available material.

My thanks to BOTH Tatev and InspiredSquare for their respective contributions.

Why don't do and get and life? You obviously have way too much spare time, with you writing three pages of in depth comments (correct me if I'm wrong). How many fine tooth combs did you go through? Maybe you should produce some videos on chess and we can see how many page of 'constructive criticism' we can come up with. Obviously you have have an extreme demand for perfection, therefore you must be so depressed and angry in life because no one in this world can meet your startard.

As a beginning chess player who has fallen in love with the game, and someone who is looking to master the French Defense, I’ve watched each of WGM Tatev Abrahamian’s 3 videos at least 7 times in their entirety, and pausing more than a hundred times throughout to take notes, before writing this review.(I see that days ago, she has just posted #4 in this series.Terrific! My comments only cover the first three videos.)

In covering the multitude of sidelines of the Winawer Variation of the French, Tatev does a very thorough and admirable job.It is clear that she loves this variation, and goes into great detail to show the viewer the large array of permutations the Winawer can take.I greatly appreciated this level of detail and thoroughness, as Tatev places at high value understanding the ideas behind the positions.I found that in studying these videos, I was much more likely to understand the position with her guidance, because she took the time to explain what the central philosophy was behind the structures.For this, I am most appreciative, and can recommend these videos without qualification.

Having said this, I also want to offer WGM Abrahamian some constructive criticism on the videos themselves, as no comprehensive review is complete without at least some suggestions that would, in this reviewer’s opinion, make them even better.First, as a non-native English speaker, Tatev’s pronunciation of ‘B’ ‘D’ and ‘E’ is often confounded and at times extremely difficult to follow.Perhaps no one has ever told her this, so I am saying it to her now for future instructional videos, which will only be better if she is able to clear up this part of her English.

Second, and more wide ranging, I found that Tatev’s organization oftentimes lacking, and sometimes quite poor, making them, at times, rather confusing to follow.It didn’t have to be this way.It is clear to this viewer, that she’s not always sure what she’s going to be discussing and how deeply, and at times ‘wings it’ not taking care to organize and build on what she’s talking about.To take just two examples, in Part II, she tells us that she is not going to cover Qg4, the mainline, but rather two sidelines of the Winawer: 5. Bd2 and 7. h4.After a few minutes, she precisely does what she says she’s not going to do, and between 4:30-6:20 (in the only time she covers the main line in superficial detail) discusses 5. Qg4 and the “Poisoned Pawn” variation.(Viewers may be surprised to know that all three of these videos are exclusively devoted to the sidelines of the Winawer Variation, and only in this two-minute segment, buried in part II, does Tatev cover the main line.Perhaps this is a way to be professionally mum, but to me it was a shocking absence, considering how these videos are labeled.If I’m missing something here, please correct me.)A second, somewhat embarassing example comes from Part III, where Tatev tells her viewers that Black’s c8 Knight always needs to be on c6, and should take care to return to this square even in the event that she successfully exchanges her light squared bishop on a6.Then perhaps 10 minutes later in the same video, she shows a position where that same Knight must not go to c6, but rather to c7 in order to offer support for a weak e6 pawn.Viewers can tell from these examples, that she hasn’t clearly organized and prepared her videos sufficiently, and as a result, I found they actually could be improved significantly.

Some very specific examples of ways the videos could have been better, but weren’t.

In Video #1:

@ 21:30 she says of 4. Qd3 “I know it’s not much of a line here, but it’s just a game.”= Unhelpful analysis

@ 24:30 she says of 4. Bd3, “We are going to play in the center, because we can.”

= Unhelpful analysis.

In Video #2:

@ opening minutes: are much better placed at the beginning of the first video, as it’s a crucial orientation to the French.= poor organization.

Covering a specific variation, her recommendation is for us to “play normal chess”.. = lazy presentation.. what does that possibly mean for someone trying to learn the French?

@ 19:40. There could be much more on the e5/Ne7 line which seems very rich in possibilities, seems to answer Roman’s video on the French, and is the line she most often plays.It’s interesting to note that this is a buried gem, and anyone who is interested in the French should take careful note of this sideline, as it’s the one Tatev herself often plays. = missed opportunity?

In Video #3:

@ 14:20, she says, “Just put your pieces on the squares designated for them” as if we know which squares are designated for which pieces.= Lazy presentation.

@27:50, in discussing the closing of the center by Black with …c4, we are told, “We are going to play c4 when it’s convenient for us, not when it’s convenient for our opponents.”I have no idea what this might entail, and unfortunately, Tatev doesn’t offer any ideas of when it might not be ‘convenient’ for us to close the center.

@ 28:00, after finishing with 7.Nf3, she returns to it to show other main options, but this subject had seemingly been left behind many minutes ago. = Poor organization.

Overall constructive comments:

·I Would have appreciated if Tatev told us the actual move number as she’s going through the variations.

·I am interested in learning more about when Black would want to play f6, and under what conditions he would want to wait, or avoid it.She tells us ‘sometimes it’s a matter of taste, sometimes it a matter of timing”Sure, I don’t doubt it.But unpacking this mystical statement would have been helpful.

·The video is named ‘Completely French’ is a misnomer, unfortunately.These videos are almost exclusively devoted to the sidelines of the Winawer Variation of the French Defense, which comes about after 1. e4 e6 2, d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bd4

·I thoroughly recommend Susan Polgar’s videos on the French.Not as deep on the Winawer, but more comprehensive… and extremely well organized.

I am extremely thankful for Tatev and Chess.com for having this video, as it offers me a very accessible way to start to study the French Defense.One question: Tatev, are you making any other videos, like the Tarrasch variation?I am sure, I’m not the only one who would be excited to see her next installments.

Overall, I am both deeply grateful for and excited about learning from these videos (yes, it is ongoing) and was frustrated and at times dismayed at their more-than-rare sloppinessand disorganization, without which would have made them unqualifiedly excellent learning tools.

Tatev, This may be the best video I have seen on here! I am not "advanced" but I learned a lot from your little comments on why you don't want pieces on certain squares,rules,etc. I have heard them before but It just made more sense to me when you explained it. A lot of tactics here to go over again that could happen in a lot of openings. There is a ton of information packed into this 30 minutes. You are good at this. You must be a great teacher. Fantastic job!

Post your reply:

Completely French: The Winawer - Part 1

Making her Chess.com Video Author debut today is Women's Grandmaster Tatev Abrahamyan! There isn't a better "lead off topic" in the world for Tatev than a series describing all the ins and outs of one of black's most common, and dangerous weapons against 1.e4: The French Defense! With this series Tatev is recommending a repertoire for the black pieces, as well as offering her one of a kind insight and knowledge. Enjoy!

Women's Grandmaster Tatev Abrahamyan is one of the youngest top-rated women chess players in the United States. She's competed in multiple U.S. Women's Championships, with her best result coming in 2005 - tying for first place only to lose out in the playoff. Born in Yerevan, Armenia in 1988 - Tatev came to the U.S. as a young girl, and quickly rose through the ranks, eventually joining the U.S. Women's Olympic Team. An expert in the French Defense, Tatev's Debut Video Series reveals many of her personal repertoire secrets.

Help us finish translating:

We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!